宜宾外科整形中心医院哪家好在宜宾哪个医院去眼袋专业,宜宾怎么去除眼袋,宜宾纹眼眉哪家好,宜宾整一个鼻子大概多少钱,宜宾哪里割双眼皮价格,宜宾光子嫩肤去红血丝吗,宜宾割完双眼皮怎么护理

The Supreme Court appears deeply divided about whether it can address partisan gerrymandering and come up with a standard to decide when politicians go too far in using politics to draw congressional districts that benefit one party over another.Hearing a case on Wednesday challenging a district in Maryland, several of the justices suggested that the issue could be addressed by the courts, but grappled with how to devise a manageable standard to govern future legislative maps.How the court rules could dramatically impact future races, as Democrats try to win back the House amid widespread unhappiness at President Donald Trump. Recently a state court in Pennsylvania redrew congressional districts there, possibly serving to erase the Republicans' 12-6 district advantage.Wednesday's case was brought by a group of Republican voters in Maryland who say Democrats went too far in redrawing districts after the last census.At one point during their one hour of oral arguments, Justice Stephen Breyer wondered whether the court should take the two challenges it has already heard dealing with maps in Wisconsin and Maryland, and another case out of North Carolina and hold arguments again next fall.The suggestion could have interesting implications if Justice Anthony Kennedy, who has been considering retirement and could be a key vote in the case, were to step down at the end of this term.On the issue of partisan gerrymandering, Breyer acknowledged that there seemed like "a pretty clear violation of the Constitution in some form" but he worried that the court needed a "practical remedy" so that judges would not have to get involved in "dozens and dozens and dozens of very important political decisions."Justice Elena Kagan pointed to the case at hand and said that Democrats had gone "too far" and took a "safe" Republican district and made it into a "pretty safe one" for Democrats. She referenced a deposition that then Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley gave where he said his intent was to create a map "that all things being legal and equal, would nonetheless be more likely to elect more Democrats rather than less."Kagan asked a lawyer for Maryland, "How much more evidence of partisan intent could we need?"Breyer seemed to urge his more conservative colleagues to step in, for the first time, and devise a framework for how to address gerrymandering.Pointing to the particular facts in the case he said, "We will never have such a record again.""What do we do, just say goodbye... forget it," Breyer asked.The challengers say former Democratic Gov. Martin O'Malley led the charge to redraw the lines to unseat long-time GOP incumbent Rep. Roscoe Bartlett. They argue that Democrats diluted the votes of Republicans in the district by moving them to another district that had a safe margin for Democrats.In 2010, Bartlett won his district with by 28 percentage points, but he lost after the new maps were drawn in 2012 by 21 percentage points.But Justice Samuel Alito seemed to be on the other side of the spectrum and said, "Hasn't this Court said time and again you can't take all consideration of partisan advantage out of redistricting?"Justice Anthony Kennedy, whose vote could be critical, did not tip his hand but indicated that the current map, no matter what happens in the court, would have to be used in the next cycle.While the Supreme Court has a standard limiting the overreliance on race in map drawing except under the most limited circumstances, it has never been successful in developing a test concerning political gerrymandering. If the justices do come up with a standard, it could reshape the political landscape.In court, Michael Kimberly, a lawyer for the challengers, said that the Democratic politicians violated the free speech rights of voters by retaliating against them based on their party registration and prior voting history.He said that government officials may not "single out" a voter based on the votes he cast before.Maryland Solicitor General Steven Sullivan defended the map and suggested that the courts should stay out of an issue that is "inherently political." He argued that if the challengers prevail in their First Amendment challenge, it will mean that any partisan motive by political players would constitutionally doom all district maps.Justice Neil Gorsuch, appearing to agree with Sullivan, noted that the maps had been approved by the legislature.The challengers suffered a setback in the lower court when a special three-judge panel of federal judges refused to issue a preliminary injunction.Last year, the Supreme Court heard a similar political gerrymandering case in Wisconsin.That case was a statewide challenge brought by Democratic challengers to Republican-drawn state legislative maps. Challengers rely on both the First Amendment charge and say the maps violated the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment.It is unclear why the Supreme Court added the Maryland case to the docket after hearing arguments in the Wisconsin case. 5026

The White House has cut ties with a senior adviser to first lady Melania Trump after it was revealed the aide's firm was paid close to million to plan events around President Donald Trump's inauguration.The first lady's office said in a statement that it ended its contract with Stephanie Winston Wolkoff, who had been working as a special government employee."The Office of the First Lady severed the gratuitous services contract with Ms. Wolkoff. We thank her for her hard work and wish her all the best," said spokeswoman Stephanie Grisham.The New York Times first reported Wolkoff's departure.Inauguration committee tax documents revealed last week showed WIS Media Partners, a company based in Marina Del Ray, California, and founded by Wolkoff, received ,843,509 for "event production services."The roughly million the company received for its work on the inauguration was likely passed through to other vendors and event coordinators. The New York Times reported that Wolkoff personally received .62 million for her work.She told the Times on Monday that most of the million was paid to subcontractors, and that the .62 million was divided among 15 employees. Messages left by CNN with Wolkoff were not immediately returned.Last week, Grisham said Melania Trump "had no involvement" in planning the inauguration and had "no knowledge of how funds were spent."Trump and Wolkoff are longtime friends.  1438

The recommended amount of sleep for adults is six to eight hours a night. Sleeping more than those hours is associated with an increased risk of death and cardiovascular diseases, says a global study published Wednesday in the European Heart Journal.Looking at data from 21 countries, across seven regions, the research team found that people sleeping more than the recommended upper limit of eight hours increased their risk of risk of major cardiovascular events, like stroke or heart failure, as well as death by up to 41%.But a possible reason for this could be that people have underlying conditions causing them to sleep longer, which in turn could raise the risk of cardiovascular disease or mortality, explain the authors of the study.The team, led by Chuangshi Wang, a Ph.D. student at McMaster and Peking Union Medical College in China, also identified a rising risk among daytime nappers."Daytime napping was associated with increased risks of major cardiovascular events and deaths in those with [more than] six hours of nighttime sleep but not in those sleeping [less than] 6 hours a night," Wang said.In those who underslept, "a daytime nap seemed to compensate for the lack of sleep at night and to mitigate the risks," Wang explained.Previous studies into this topic were mainly carried out in North America, Europe and Japan. The new study brings a global picture.But the findings are observational, meaning the cause of this association remains unknown."Even though the findings were very interesting they don't prove cause and effect," said Julie Ward, a senior cardiac nurse at the British Heart Foundation, who was not involved in the study.Having less sleep -- under six hours -- was also shown to increase these risks by 9%, compared with people who slept for the recommended six to eight hours, but this finding was not considered to be statistically significant by the team.In 2014, 35.2% of American adults reported not getting enough sleep with less than seven hours per night, according to the CDC. 2049

The United States has reached another grim milestone in the COVID-19 pandemic. The nation’s death toll has surpassed 170,000, Johns Hopkins data showed Monday morning.On Sunday alone, deaths in the U.S. rose by over 480, according to a Reuters tally, with Florida, Texas and Louisiana reporting the most fatalities.The U.S. continues to lead the world in deaths and the number of cases reported, with at least 5.4 million people diagnosed with the novel coronavirus in the country. Johns Hopkins shows the next highest country is Brazil, with over 3.3 million diagnosed and 107,000 dead.Citing a national ensemble forecast, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said last Thursday that estimates show the U.S. could reach 200,000 deaths from COVID-19 by Labor Day weekend.The head of the CDC says the pandemic could become even more dire in the months to come. Director Robert Redfield told WebMD that “this could be the worst fall, from a public health perspective, we’ve ever seen.”The reason? Redfield points to the combination of the COVID-19 surge and flu season. He said, "we're going to have COVID in the fall, we're going to have flu in the fall."The CDC continues to encourage Americans to wash their hands, socially distance themselves, wear masks, and avoid large gatherings.Click here to learn more about how the CDC recommends you protect yourself and others from the coronavirus. 1410

The three wildfires currently burning in California are moving across land with a terrifying speed.At its fastest, the Camp Fire in Northern California spread at more than a football field a second, or around 80 football fields per minute. It burned through 20,000 acres in less than 14 hours on Thursday. By Friday, it had reached 90,000 acres.PHOTOS: 3 wildfires rage in CaliforniaThe Woolsey Fire in Ventura and Los Angeles counties doubled in size in a 90-minute period Friday morning, to 8,000 acres -- by Friday evening, it was up to 35,000 acres.The Hill Fire in Ventura County torched 10,000 acres in six hours Thursday.Why are the fires moving so quickly?The combination of strong offshore winds that have been gusting as high as 70 mph, humidity values in the single digits and extremely dry conditions are leading to the perfect conditions for wildfires 872